345 Ga. App. 822
Ga. Ct. App.2018Background
- In July 2015 Burns’s stepdaughter sent a Twitter message alleging a sexual incident with Burns and added that “my brother’s best friend tried to rape me.”
- At a forensic interview the stepdaughter denied the separate rape claim, saying she had made it up and may have been high on marijuana; Burns’s wife corroborated the recantation.
- Burns was charged with aggravated sexual battery, aggravated sodomy, and incest based on the stepdaughter’s allegation against Burns.
- The State moved in limine to exclude evidence that the stepdaughter had previously made a false sexual allegation against another person, invoking the rape-shield statute and OCGA § 24-4-403.
- The trial court excluded the evidence under OCGA § 24-4-403 as having limited probative value, lacking specificity, and posing unfair prejudice or confusion, despite finding it was a disavowed false statement.
- Burns obtained interlocutory review; the Court of Appeals reversed the exclusion and remanded, finding the evidence admissible for impeachment and confrontation purposes.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the rape-shield statute bars evidence of a victim’s prior false sexual accusation against a third party | Burns: Not barred; it attacks victim credibility and shows propensity to fabricate | State: Initially argued exclusion under rape-shield and evidentiary rules | Court: Rape-shield does not bar such evidence (Smith governs) |
| Whether trial court properly excluded the prior false allegation under OCGA § 24-4-403 | Burns: Probative value substantial for impeachment; exclusion infringes confrontation/right to present a defense | State: Evidence prejudicial, confusing, and lacked specificity | Court: Exclusion under § 24-4-403 was erroneous; probative value not substantially outweighed here |
| Whether the court made the required threshold finding of falsity before admitting the prior accusation | Burns: Threshold was satisfied because the victim disavowed the allegation | State: (Implicitly) contest admissibility | Court: Trial court made the threshold finding that the statement was false, satisfying Smith’s requirement |
| Whether specific-instance impeachment (OCGA § 24-6-608(b)) permits inquiry into the prior false allegation | Burns: Permitted on cross-examination to attack truthfulness | State: Relied on exclusionary rules to prevent extrinsic proof | Court: Such specific-instance impeachment is permissible for impeachment and confrontation; exclusion was reversible |
Key Cases Cited
- Smith v. State, 259 Ga. 135 (holding rape-shield does not bar evidence of victim’s prior false sexual accusations against others and requiring a threshold finding of probable falsity)
- Olds v. State, 299 Ga. 65 (§ 24-4-403 should be used sparingly)
- Morgan v. State, 337 Ga. App. 29 (confirming Smith remains good law under new Evidence Code)
- Olden v. Kentucky, 488 U.S. 227 (Confrontation principles can overcome speculative prejudice justifications for exclusion)
- Davis v. Alaska, 415 U.S. 308 (Confrontation right includes exposing facts for jurors to assess witness reliability)
- Benton v. State, 265 Ga. 648 (reversing convictions where prior false accusation evidence was wrongly excluded)